2013 Judson bond proposal may avoid tax increase

A stripped-down proposal to build two new schools could go before voters in the Judson Independent School District as early as May, if trustees agree to move forward with the plan.

Though Judson staffers have said the growing district needs a new high school and three new elementaries, recent discussions have revolved around a plan to build one high school and one elementary.

A bond of up to $80 million could proceed with no tax rate increase, assuming a 1 percent increase in the taxable value of property in the district, Duane Westerman, managing director of SAMCO Capital Markets, told trustees last month.

At the same meeting, Superintendent Willis Mackey said he would like to build a high school to initially house 1,600 students but with common areas such as a library and cafeteria that could support a core capacity of 2,400 students if additional classrooms are added.

He estimated that such a building would cost $53 million to $63 million, similar to the district's Wagner High School, which opened seven years ago with a core capacity of 2,300.

Mackey also said he'd like to replicate the district's Rolling Meadows Elementary School, which opened on time and under budget in 2011 with a total price tag of $16.9 million.

He didn't give a total dollar amount for the plan, but suggested it would not trigger a tax rate increase.

Two years ago — still smarting from a 2006 bond program with several late and over-budget projects — voters rejected a $198 million proposal that included a new high school and two new elementary schools.

A recent phone survey commissioned by the district revealed lingering concerns about district spending but showed voter support for a bond increased significantly if the projects required little or no tax increase.

In the survey, 42 percent of the roughly 300 respondents said they believe the district manages its money “wastefully and inefficiently.”

However, 62 percent said they would support a bond program that would “not increase or would only slightly increase” property taxes.

Mackey declined an interview request, saying through a spokesman that for him or operations director Daniel Kershner to comment on the plan would be “jumping the gun.”

Unlike many other school districts that involve their residents in bond planning from the start, the Judson plan came directly from district administration.

He said last week that although the district needs to rebuild public trust, he doesn't think voters will mind being left out of initial planning.

“What else can we do? We need a high school, we need an elementary school, we're not raising taxes,” Salyer said. “What planning is there to do?”

Trustees could vote Thursday to allow staffers to hire an architect to produce preliminary drawings, said the Judson board's president, Arnoldo Salinas.

Absent from last month's meeting, Salinas said he wasn't prepared to talk about Mackey's plan but added that he believes it's time for a new bond.

Both of the district's comprehensive high schools are over capacity, as well as at least four elementary schools. But district projections show that a number of other campuses will remain under capacity even 10 years from now.

Previously, trustee June Adair questioned how citizens would respond to a new bond proposal if the district didn't first shift campus boundaries to fully utilize existing space.

On Friday, Adair said she supports moving forward with a bond but continues to view boundary changes as a faster, though temporary, solution.

If trustees adopt a bond proposal, it would likely go before voters in May, district spokesman Steve Linscomb said.

“We're three years behind right now and if we don't start soon we're going to be another three years behind,” he said at the meeting.

However, trustee Jose Macias questioned asking for just two schools when enrollment projections suggest more are needed, saying the board should avoid the need to repeat the effort in another year and “go for it all and go for it by involving the community.”

Some trustees said they like the idea of putting forward a bond with a good shot at passing, but noted it's important to be upfront with citizens about future needs.

“That's the way we have to think,” trustee Gilbert Flores said. “We can't be reactive anymore. We have to be proactive.”